The Original Entry:
The primitive reactionism to the bombings in London is starting to build:
- Email spying ?could have stopped killers? [Guardian] ? wow, what a no-brainer that statement is. Email spying would have next to no effect on competent extremists ? simply from the wealth of simple to use encryption software out there to using ?coded? cover stories in plain text emails (9/11 was apparently organised using the simple cover story of a wedding with email/IM/phone conversations about who could attend etc.)
- Did soft touch Britain make it easy for the al-Qaeda killers? [The Scotsman] ? having the state restrict political and religious freedom would seem to be an obvious desired outcome on the part of the people behind the attacks ? it's the best recruiting aid they could hope for.
From the (surprising but honourable and proud) way that Londoners and politicians appeared to act on Thursday with steely resolve not to have the attacks change their way of life, I was hopeful that freedom would not be the scapegoat.
The scanners can spot the waistcoat bombs usually worn by suicide bombers
It would seem to me presumptuous to install such a system when it is not (apparently) known that suicide bombers were present and that if they were that they were wearing waistcoat bombs or using other devices that would be so recognisable. Sounds more like an expensive icon to reassure the public rather than an effective barrier to bomb attacks. On the other hand sniffer dogs, or electronic devices that detect explosives, would seem to be a more effective and measured response.
I also see that Michael Howard is using the bombings to push his immigration agenda [The Guardian]:
The Conservative leader, Michael Howard, who has so far restricted his remarks to those of condolences to relatives of the bombs' victims and condemnation of the attacks, today renewed his demand for extra security measures at British borders.
The best answer to Michael Howard's rhetoric is this news article based on comments from Former Metropolitan Police chief Sir John Stevens [Yahoo]:
the London bombers were "almost certainly" British and that there were many more born and bred here willing to attack.
Government wants email and phone data kept for intelligence [Reuters]. I don't object too strongly to a simple log of my calls (number dialled and when) being stored as there's little private information involved, although I'm still uncomfortable with that level of government snooping, but I do object very strongly to the blanket storage of content. At this point it's not clear whether email content would be stored as the reference to storage is phrased in terms of phone calls.